gm@trsvax.UUCP (10/19/84)
> You know, there IS a legal way to handle this. Contact the syndicate with > distribution rights for the column and see how much they'd charge for the > rights to post it on USENET. > ..decvax!seismo!elsie!ado (301) 496-5688 Well, I did just that. Since I'm not too far from the Dallas Times Herald, I called them up. A fellow there informed me that all of the syndication rights for Joe Bob were handled by the LA Times Syndicate. I called them up (800-528-4637) and talked to one of their salesmen. I then tried to explain to him what USENET and ARPANET were. A partial transcript of the session follows: Me: "(from the standard introduction) USENET is a highly decentralized group of computers consisting of approx. 1200 sites world-wide." Him: "Excuse me, did you say world-wide?" "Yes, there are sites in Australia, the Far East, Canada, and Europe. But the biggest bulk is here in the US." "So how many people read this thing?" "Nobody really knows for sure." "Who is in charge?" "Nobody." "Is there any kind of brochure or pamplet discribing this?" "Nope." [and so on...] He went on to say that this would be entirely new, because the LA Times only deals with printed media. He would have to discuss this with his boss, the Dallas Times Herald, and Joe Bob before anything could be done. He called me back today and said that yes, this could be done, under a few restrictions. Namely: When the newspapers buy a feature, they get exclusive rights to have that in that area. For example, the Dallas Morning News cannot purchase Joe Bob, because the Times has the rights for Dallas/Ft. Worth. So, if a newspaper starts complaining that USENET is unfairly distributing Joe Bob, they will have to stop us. Joe Bob must *not* appear in any other form than electronic. This means that someone cannot download Joe Bob for their campus newspaper. There would be a few advantages. The biggest being that we could legally read Joe Bob. We could probably also arrange it to be downloaded from the AP or UPI newswires, to save someone from having to type it all in. But then the real problem. They want "only" $100 a week for the rights to distribute Joe Bob (with a $1200 advanced payment). I guess this could be done, after all, there are around 1200 sites, if each site contributes a dollar... But who would want to send their dollars off to an unknown person, who could very easily pocket the money. Besides, Joe Bob is good, but not *that* good. After talking with him a while, I found out that they base the rates on the number of people who will read it. For example, a small town newspaper may only pay $10 a week for Joe Bob, whereas the Houston Post would pay $50. That seems a bit unfair. After all, even by generous estimates, there is no more than 300,000 people who are on the net, contrasted to the Houston Post with a readership of around a million. What do y'all think about it? George Moore Tandy System Software uucp: {laidbak, sco, microsoft, sneaky, allegra!convex!ctvax}!trsvax!gm arpa: cu-arpa.trsvax!gm@Cornell.ARPA * Kilroy occupied these coordinates *
drp@ptsfb.UUCP (Dale Pederson) (10/23/84)
> > You know, there IS a legal way to handle this. Contact the syndicate with > > distribution rights for the column and see how much they'd charge for the > > rights to post it on USENET. > > ..decvax!seismo!elsie!ado (301) 496-5688 > > Well, I did just that, they want "only" $100 a week for the rights to > distribute Joe Bob (with a $1200 advanced payment). I guess this could be > done, if each site contributes a > dollar... Joe Bob is available in the SF Bay Area Sunday "Chronicle-Examiner" so I for one don't need to read him in the net.
moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) (10/24/84)
First of all, thanks to George for doing the legwork on this... it is
appreciated. For myself, I don't think there's any way in Hell we can get a
subscription going for this; $100 a week is too steep, and I'm not sure the
companies distributing USENET will want to pay for Joe Bob reviews (my guess
is that few of them know about net.movies, anyway...). I think we had
better skip posting it to the net (I agree with the arguements against
posting Joe Bob without permission... anyone dealing with software should
realize the importance of copyrights here). Easy for me to say, though --
we get it in the Seattle Times (one of the 4 good things about the paper).
Is the mailing of Joe Bob to a list illegal?
"Nun-beating? Good Lord, man, I can't condone THAT!"
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsrgv}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPAtony@ssc-bee.UUCP (Anthony Stelmack) (10/24/84)
<Original posting, in part:> > But then the real problem. They want "only" $100 a week for the rights to > distribute Joe Bob (with a $1200 advanced payment). I guess this could be > done, after all, there are around 1200 sites, if each site contributes a > dollar... But who would want to send their dollars off to an unknown > person, who could very easily pocket the money > > George Moore Tandy System Software I think it's reasonable and feasible to 'buy' (rent?) Joe Bob, although $100 a week seems a little high. First; the money would have to come from individuals, not sites. (I've never seen a VAX with a pocket, let alone a dollar in it.) I would be willing to pay a few dollars a year to have Joe Bob on the net. His columns are carried locally by the Seattle Times. Except that they are edited to avoid offending community morals, and REALLY OFFENSIVE columns just aren't published. (This in a city which reportedly ranks number one in the country in "Escort Services" per capita.) Some of the quarters I wouldn't spend on the Seattle Times could go towards Joe Bob on the net. (I probably shouldn't have said that.) Why not just start a fund that individuals can send mony to? When the fund gets big enough, Joe Bob goes on the net. When (if) the fund gets empty, he stops. Second; I think that there are probably a few trustworthy individuals on the net. Anyone who is a system administrator at a university or a software house has greater potential income sources than a possible Joe Bob Fund. Last; The real problem is finding someone to do it. I would volunteer except that I will be off the net in about three weeks, and I'm not in a good position to do it anyway, being neither a system administrator nor at a backbone site. This could be a very interesting experiment/precedent. Let's go for it!.
kek@mgweed.UUCP (Kit Kimes) (10/26/84)
I have a suggestion. Why doesn't someone do a survey of how many people read net.movies (or the Joe Bob articles) and pass this information on to the proper authorities? If we can convince them that not everyone with access to netnews reads this catagory, we may be able to get it cheaper. It's worth a try, although I'm not volunteering for the job! Kit Kimes AT&T Consumer Products Montgomery Works Montgomery, Il. 60538-0305 ..!ihnp4!mgweed!kek
apratt@iuvax.UUCP (10/27/84)
Re: survey to indicate how many people read net.movies: This kind of data is too easily munged by the survey-takers or subjects: "Do you read net.movies?" asks the surveyor. The USEnetter thinks, "If I say yes, the price of Joe Bob will go up." "No," he says... In the real world, the price of Joe Bob is based on your circulation (among other things), not on how many people read the movie ads in the paper; the analogy to that here is the number of people who have ACCESS, whether they read net.movies or not. If the site gets net.movies, each person at the site would have to be counted. This comes, by the way, with no sense of accuracy... ---- "Fritz! They've killed Fritz!" -- Allan Pratt ...ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!apratt
rh@mit-eddie.UUCP (Randy Haskins) (11/01/84)
Well, if and when someone volunteers to collect the money, and it becomes probably that such a thing might come off, I will cheerfully contribute five of my not-so-hard-earned dollars to the fund. -- Randwulf (Randy Haskins); Path= genrad!mit-eddie!rh
chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Zonker T. Chuqui) (11/02/84)
In article <13106@mgweed.UUCP> kek@mgweed.UUCP (Kit Kimes) writes: >I have a suggestion. Why doesn't someone do a survey of how many >people read net.movies (or the Joe Bob articles) and pass this >information on to the proper authorities? If we can convince them >that not everyone with access to netnews reads this catagory, we >may be able to get it cheaper. It's worth a try, although I'm >not volunteering for the job! From looking at the syndicator's request, it looks to me like they set an artifically high price on purpose to discourage the deal from going through. There are many unknown factors, not the least of which is the possibility of infringing upon their other syndicated audiences that they have guaranteed exclusivity to. Another is the unknown about the size of the audience, and a third is the kinds of precedents being set by moving it around electronically. They probably didn't want to say 'no' outright, but I don't think they're very comfortable with the situation. chuq -- From the Department of Bistromatics: Chuq Von Rospach {cbosgd,decwrl,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA I'd know those eyes from a million years away....
msc@qubix.UUCP (Mark Callow) (11/02/84)
> From looking at the syndicator's request, it looks to me like they set an > artifically high price on purpose to discourage the deal from going Of course they did. They don't know what to ask so they set a high price and they expect to negotiate from that to a price that both sides feel is fair. -- From the TARDIS of Mark Callow msc@qubix.UUCP, qubix!msc@decwrl.ARPA ...{decvax,ucbvax}!decwrl!qubix!msc, ...{amd,ihnp4,ittvax}!qubix!msc
6912ar04@sjuvax.UUCP (rowley) (11/12/84)
Please post where I can find Joe Bob in the Pennsylvania area.
(or better yet, mail a copy to me once in a while!)
A. J. Rowley
--
There is no dark side of the moon really; as a matter of fact, it's all dark...
-"Eclipse", Pink Floyd